NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Gateway Notebook Forums › Gateway Notebooks › broke 12k finally on 3dmark01
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

broke 12k finally on 3dmark01

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7693945

12336 was my highest score before I started noticing some slight tearing during the tests.
post #2 of 14
wow, that's impressive man. what were the vid clock rates for that? would you say it's stable enough to play for an hour.. 2.. or is this benching for the sake of benching?
post #3 of 14
Typically this sort of thing is benchmarking for curiosities sake. Nothing wrong with that, I do it too; but, it is typically not indicative of game play.
For example, I find that 3dmark-03 is far more likely to expose weakness in my system (due to OC) then any of my games. That benchmark either fails quickly or succeeds. If it succeeds I find that unless something changes (such as significant heat in the room, etc) the system is typically stable at that OC. But conversely even if the benchmark fails, it "might" work for all my games. I tried Madden at a level that the bench mark said was too high and the very graphical football game played just fine.
I just was curious. I never run at an OC above what the benchmark says is stable. Why take chances with random crashes?
post #4 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bjorn
I find that 3dmark-03 is far more likely to expose weakness in my system (due to OC) then any of my games. That benchmark either fails quickly or succeeds. If it succeeds I find that unless something changes (such as significant heat in the room, etc) the system is typically stable at that OC.
I ran that one also...

3449

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2278858

*update. I ran that test yesterday and the ORB never mentioned anything about the drivers, yet today when I went back to it, it mentions that it was run on drivers that can't be verified, or some BS like that. Im using the omega 2.5 drivers which have never caused a problem before.
post #5 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by h00ligan
wow, that's impressive man. what were the vid clock rates for that? would you say it's stable enough to play for an hour.. 2.. or is this benching for the sake of benching?
At the clock speeds I was running for that one benchmark, I turned up the vid memory pretty high..close to 250 i think, which was causing tearing. I usually keep it at 230 or so and its stable in everything I do.
post #6 of 14
thanks for the info.. also.. what was the core speed.. i don't seem to see it.. additionally.. i am a little new to clockgen.. i dont' see the options to set it up with just the fsb... just everything up.. should i see more then one slider or iis that all you used..

have you found a way to run clockgen at startup?
post #7 of 14
Which version of clockgen do I need for the M6805? Which Motherboard does it use? Thanks
post #8 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by h00ligan
thanks for the info.. also.. what was the core speed.. i don't seem to see it.. additionally.. i am a little new to clockgen.. i dont' see the options to set it up with just the fsb... just everything up.. should i see more then one slider or iis that all you used..

have you found a way to run clockgen at startup?
I was running the core at 440 - 460 with slight variences in the memory. As for clockgen, the settings will stay even if you restart your computer, as long as you don't fully shut it down. Mine stays on almost 24/7 and even after I restart it (or wake from sleep mode) it retains its settings. I have done nothing to retain the settings, they just stay until you completely shut your computer down.

To answer the next persons question, use the clockgen CG-ICS950403.
post #9 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaggy2003
To answer the next persons question, use the clockgen CG-ICS950403.
I downloaded both ICS950403 and ICS950405, because when I run CPU-Z (Mainboard tab), it tells me the M6805 chipset is the VIA K8T800 (VT8383).
The Clockgen site indicates that version CG-ICS050405 should be run on this chipset. I haven't run either version yet--wanted to sort this out first. Anyone have more insight?
post #10 of 14
i used 05 last night.
post #11 of 14
For curiosities sake.... what was your original STOCK SETTINGS 3dMark2001 score? I only got a 9194 on my brand new 6809. I don't know if this is an average score or what? I have radlinker installed and am going to try some vidcard overclocking to see what that will do.
post #12 of 14
I installed Radlinker and bumped the core/mem up to 445/229 respectively as per several examples from this thread. My 3dMark2001 score with the overclock was 11,645. That's quite a jump from the stock settings score of 9194, so I guess this ATI9600 must be way underclocked from the factory. BTW, the 6809 didn't get warm at all while running the 3dMark2001 even with the overclock. So far I am very happy overall with this rig!
post #13 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teegunn
For curiosities sake.... what was your original STOCK SETTINGS 3dMark2001 score? I only got a 9194 on my brand new 6809. I don't know if this is an average score or what? I have radlinker installed and am going to try some vidcard overclocking to see what that will do.
Getting a score in the mid 9,000's is average for stock. 11,000 and higher is easily obtainable, even by only increasing the video cards speed and not the cpu speed.
post #14 of 14
I just bumped the core/mem up to 486/229 and got a 12,015 score on 3dMark2001se. Any more OCing caused tearing so I stopped there. That's was pushing the limit IMO anyway. I will probably OC the CPU a little sometime down the road just to see if I can do any better. But really even at stock settings this thing is playing games fine so I doubt I will OC on a regular basis.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Gateway Notebooks
NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Gateway Notebook Forums › Gateway Notebooks › broke 12k finally on 3dmark01